You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

I guess that would be my Ne thinking, you know, constantly coming up with ideas by jumping/piggybacking, and leapfrogging for a original idea.

HA, and yes, I agree with the ENFP earlier who said when they're inspired, everybody should get out of the way.
When I do that, I start writing my ideas on a spare peice of paper before my next leapfrog thought comes.

My interpretation of this is that Fi would actually do both of the things you have listed (stand up for self and friends) and that Fe might do it too, but in a more "socially appropriate" way intended to smooth things over with all parties involved, like a PC referree. I don't see Fe in general saying "Bitch prepare to be ________" lol. Maybe it's just me...

Concerning human rights in particular. I consider Fe to be human rights, and Fi the interpretation thereof.

Uhh no, seriously, Fe doesn't care about moral ideals. Fe's morality comes entirely from its community and will change if the community's moral opinion changes. Fe has NOTHING to do with arbitrary conceptions of morality about things like human rights; that is 100% Fi, no matter what you "consider" it to be.

Fe could potentially care about human rights but only as a function of its community group picking human rights as an important cause!

Remember, Fe's morals come from its surroundings, not from within.

Originally Posted by LEVINA

Hmmm. I always thought that being an Fe user means you liked to care for others, as in, "I need to care for others". Or maybe, it's just those who are close to them or whatnot. Excuse me while I go myself.

Fe usually needs to care for others because caring for others is almost universally considered an appropriate emotional response by the standards of just about every community in history. Fe reads and responds directly to the emotional sensibilities of others only insofar as community standards say it should--if an Fe user thinks you are behaving inappropriately, he will attempt to show publicly to the entire community that you are disregarding its standards. Note that there isn't actually any "What you are doing is WRONG!" (that would be Fi), but rather just, "What you are doing violates the standards of our community"...which is Fe's very definition of "morally wrong."

If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

Uhh no, seriously, Fe doesn't care about moral ideals. Fe's morality comes entirely from its community and will change if the community's moral opinion changes. Fe has NOTHING to do with arbitrary conceptions of morality about things like human rights; that is 100% Fi, no matter what you "consider" it to be.

Fe could potentially care about human rights but only as a function of its community group picking human rights as an important cause!

Remember, Fe's morals come from its surroundings, not from within.

I see you missed the joke in it though...

I meant that Fe is the type that goes about human rights, without actually being bothered what these rights should attain. Whereas Fi is interested in the details and construction of said rights. (Fe holding up a sign "Vote for human rights!", Fi holding up a sign "It is our right to 'insert x'")

I meant that Fe is the type that goes about human rights, without actually being bothered what these rights should attain. Whereas Fi is interested in the details and construction of said rights. (Fe holding up a sign "Vote for human rights!", Fi holding up a sign "It is our right to 'insert x'")

:P

I see...that's a prettttttttty subtle joke then, isn't it?

If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

Fe usually needs to care for others because caring for others is almost universally considered an appropriate emotional response by the standards of just about every community in history. Fe reads and responds directly to the emotional sensibilities of others only insofar as community standards say it should--if an Fe user thinks you are behaving inappropriately, he will attempt to show publicly to the entire community that you are disregarding its standards. Note that there isn't actually any "What you are doing is WRONG!" (that would be Fi), but rather just, "What you are doing violates the standards of our community"...which is Fe's very definition of "morally wrong."

Wouldn't that be considering other people? I thought being Fe ment putting others (even if it sounds like they're being comformists) "first" when discussing the issues.

Wouldn't that be considering other people? I thought being Fe ment putting others (even if it sounds like they're being comformists) "first" when discussing the issues.

Just noticed the above post. LOL, /end arguement?

No, that's just something that Fe users happen to do a lot because their community standard says they should.

Fe doesn't have any internally rigid set of morals; for Fe morality itself exists only in the external world as a function of its own group's moral standards. Group mentality is very important to Fe. Often Fe+Ni or Fe+Si will see morality purely as a means to an end and not an end unto itself (this is where it differs greatly from Fi.)

If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

"I meant that Fe is the type that goes about human rights, without actually being bothered what these rights should attain. Whereas Fi is interested in the details and construction of said rights. (Fe holding up a sign "Vote for human rights!", Fi holding up a sign "It is our right to 'insert x'")
"

Wouldn't that be considering other people? I thought being Fe ment putting others (even if it sounds like they're being comformists) "first" when discussing the issues.

Just noticed the above post. LOL, /end arguement?

It might help if you didn't necessarily think of Fe always as putting others first, but rather as people who seek group harmony for their own ideal of harmony's sake, rather than for anyone's actual "highest good". That's why ugly forms of Fe are more manipulative than "caring."

At least that's how I see it. Fe users can actually be pretty nasty in a passive-aggressive way, and blatantly make it obvious that what they care about is say, for example but not as the ultimate goal...peace and quiet vs. anyone's actual happiness nor a satisfying conclusion for the other individuals involved. Fe can come across more as "why are you acting like that?" than "how may I help you?"

I'm not Fe bashing. I'm just trying to make you see it in a different light than simply (supposedly) wanting to "help other people."

Yes, but so can Fi so phrasing it this way doesn't really differentiate between the two.

The difference is really just that Fi's morality is internal and arbitrary and seeks to be as ethical as possible as an end unto itself; Fe's morality is external and changes with the group mentality, seeking to use morality as a means to complete external goals.

Both might say, "Why are you acting like that?"; the important thing is that Fi would base this upon an internally "objective" definition of morality according to its own private ideals, whereas Fe would say it in reference to the community etiquette standard. It's "Your behavior is inherently morally wrong" vs. "Your behavior violates our group's beliefs [and is therefore wrong]."

Subtle but important.

If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?